The clip being debated (if you follow the links back to the original blog post on pedimom.com) is almost certainly this scene from Family Guy, not something mysterious like a razor blade in a candy apple. It definitely didn't belong on YouTube Kids, but you should think twice about that before deciding how to react.
It's a continuum. At one end you have very computing-centric issues like "how confident does this automated turret need to be about the identity of its target before opening fire?" which isn't really a business matter at all. At the opposite end are things like "should skin colour factor into eligibility for a home loan?" which is clearly a monetary risk assessment. Ethics in Computing courses tend to cover this whole spectrum, along with topics like net neutrality, media piracy (and toxic industry behaviour), and the social impact of the surveillance state. You're right that whenever business decisions get automated, there's a convergence between business and computing ethics, but there are many other ethical dilemmas that a programmer may need to be aware of in order to be a responsible professional. That's why these courses are often mandatory for CS majors.
Yes; conferences are just as much about networking opportunities as they are about consuming presentations, if not moreso. If they weren't, then the format would have been replaced with YouTube channels by now.
This gets trotted out a lot. It shows up repeatedly in the context of NAFTA and it showed up when Canada was negotiating CETA. Guess what the solution is? The rest of the treaty. That's where all the environmental protection stuff is, all the workers' rights, etc. If the laws are harmonized then the companies don't have a leg to stand on. Ever since Trump brought up renegotiating NAFTA, Trudeau and his team have been trying to use it to fix US law around unions in order to level the playing field. You can't sue if the laws are the same everywhere in the treaty zone.
This just in: systemd-powered prosthetics will begin shipping with GNOME pre-installed. At press time, Miguelenart de Poettericaza, spokesmonster for GNOMEmd says he expects this latest infliction upon the Slashdot community to be the ultimate achievement in nipple-twisting agony, and harrowingly suggested they were looking at encrypting all future system logs using blockchain technology to ensure that users would always have the best experience, whether they wanted it or not.
That is true, but, again, this is a specific body of work that combines the same recordings of nursery rhymes with bizarre gibberish videos. It's not content that anyone wants, and it's only thrived because of how YouTube's auto-play works, essentially using toddlers to farm ad money. Fingerprinting it will be pretty easy and reliable based on the reused audio channels.
(...And yes, I know Surface tablets sell decently well. Just not "iPad" well. They haven't really found a niche, they've just been forcing their nose into a space better served by a laptop with a real keyboard.)
They tried that already. Gates himself picked Windows 8 tablets over the Courier because it was easier to integrate into the Outlook/Exchange ecosystem. Given how spectacularly and repeatedly Windows tablets have failed, it's good that they're finally revisiting what everyone thought was their ace in the hole against Apple. Watch this video. You're right, it's not a product for everyone, but for the creative professionals who make up the bulk of macOS's (ever-dwindling) userbase, it was way more attractive than the passivity of an iPad, and likely still is.
I believe the generally accepted view on the evolutionary impact of sexual dimorphism, in most mammals, is that males are experimental (and relatively expendable, as far as biological fitness is concerned; the act of copulation is a relatively brief part of childrearing.) Take, for example, the X chromosome: with only one copy, males experience its effects far more prominently. In females, one of the copies of the X chromosome is selected at random to be disabled, so the two copies are averaged out, statistically driving the overall phenotype toward the mean. There are a number of physiological traits that exhibit this pattern, for example men have a higher standard deviation in height than women. In a hunter-gatherer scenario, this protects the nucleus of the tribe from deleterious mutations, and is a key advantage of sexual reproduction.
Time to undo some mod points, because this comment is too good to pass up! I've been a student of Multics lore for a few years—it was way before my time—and the answer is that the obsession with this was beyond amazing. The MIT site would regularly split their system into two while doing debugging, removing IO controllers and CPUs from the main system (without shutting it down) until they had enough hardware set aside to bring up another instance of the OS, still sharing disk drives. They also a per-resource-usage billing system, that could price processing time and I/O as needed. It's much more meticulous accounting than what you'd see on a modern PBS-based cluster, or even Amazon Web Services. Most users would see an account balance upon logging in, and I believe some of the logs at the dps8m site, from when they were getting the emulator up and running, have balance numbers scattered throughout them. These are key features that distinguish Multics from other operating systems—there are lots of posts in this thread that mention Multics being distinctive, but none of them seem to actually touch on any details besides fault recovery.
The vision was called computing as a utility, and the Project MAC team wanted Multics machines to be as reliable and ubiquitous as electricity or telephone service. Alas, the clusters we have today are far more limited in accessibility and rarely have worthy access protections (I could, for example, ssh into a random node on my university's cluster and bring it to a halt with a forkbomb, messing up any jobs running on it), and to even approach the kind of scaling and subdivision Multics supported, we have to resort to networks of numerous discrete computers rather than a single, unified OS.
More generally, if the information gets stolen, you can never change it. Locks, passwords, and challenge-response seeds can all be replaced. No other authentication method has this glaring weakness. The burden of manual authentication is here to stay, I think, until we get password manager brain implants.
As you may know, net neutrality is a set of rules which say Internet Service Providers (ISPs) such as Comcast, Time Warner, AT&T, and Verizon, cannot block, throttle or prioritize certain content on the Internet. Knowing this, do you support or oppose net neutrality?
Strongly support: 24%
Somewhat support: 37%
Somewhat oppose: 13%
Strongly oppose: 5%
Don't Know / No Opinion: 21%
So that's 61% in favour of net neutrality rather than the abstract jargon-laden questions of 88% of people disagreeing with "the government should have the ability to set the specific prices, terms and conditions for Internet access," the 43% people who believe the internet would "get worse" if "government were to regulate Internet access as a utility" (ignoring the fact that it arguably already does, and things clearly are not getting progressively worse already), and the 51% who said "Internet access should not be considered a public utility regulated by the federal government" when it was compared to everything but telecommunications.
Two points arise from this: the 5% of people who 'strongly oppose' net neutrality may very well believe they're supporting censorship of terrorist propaganda, and if there is a major overlap between the population segment that wants an open internet and the one that wants minimal government interference in ISPs, they're probably free-market idealists who want the ISPs to have the good taste to maintain net neutrality without government oversight, much like the software industry created the ESRB to avoid government regulation of video game ratings.
It's not surprising the comment resonates with him—buzzwords like "bipartisan light-touch" are basically copied right out of his mouth. Maybe he's behind the bot?
It doesn't, as I said; all of the positives that he cites would be obtainable if Windows Update were hookable by others. Presumably he feels that the success of a Store-limited version of Windows is the only marketplace-feasible way to accomplish this, as developers would be pressured into using it in order to reach an audience, but that's really more of a reason why Windows 10 S won't succeed in any real sense, beyond filling Microsoft's traditional need to inure an impressionable sub-population (in this case, the next generation of children) to Windows.
The summary provided isn't terribly sharp; it takes out any of the justification provided in the Ars piece and relates mostly the author's opinions. Mr. Bright's actual argument is that the Windows 10 Store fills the hole of a single, consistent package manager, promising that applications will be cleanly installed, updated, and uninstalled without the diversity of mechanisms abundant currently. He doesn't offer any defense of Windows 10 S beyond that, nor of the essential problem of a locked-down ecosystem and all of the censorship-related complications, which are waved off in the first three paragraphs (along with a screenshot of the Popcorn Time installer failing to run.) I don't believe he even defends the ostensible cleanliness benefits of closed ecosystems. All of the positives that he cites would be obtainable if it were simply possible to hook into Windows Update, a notion he mentions.
Slashdot Mirror
The clip being debated (if you follow the links back to the original blog post on pedimom.com) is almost certainly this scene from Family Guy, not something mysterious like a razor blade in a candy apple. It definitely didn't belong on YouTube Kids, but you should think twice about that before deciding how to react.
The role of governmental regulation in AI decision-making is a hot topic in civilian situations too. For example, in how self-driving cars should decide whose life to save in an unavoidable, impending accident.
Also, Israel doesn't need to import autonomous weapons systems. It has its own. (Spoilers: the UN is not pleased.)
It's a continuum. At one end you have very computing-centric issues like "how confident does this automated turret need to be about the identity of its target before opening fire?" which isn't really a business matter at all. At the opposite end are things like "should skin colour factor into eligibility for a home loan?" which is clearly a monetary risk assessment. Ethics in Computing courses tend to cover this whole spectrum, along with topics like net neutrality, media piracy (and toxic industry behaviour), and the social impact of the surveillance state. You're right that whenever business decisions get automated, there's a convergence between business and computing ethics, but there are many other ethical dilemmas that a programmer may need to be aware of in order to be a responsible professional. That's why these courses are often mandatory for CS majors.
Yes; conferences are just as much about networking opportunities as they are about consuming presentations, if not moreso. If they weren't, then the format would have been replaced with YouTube channels by now.
This gets trotted out a lot. It shows up repeatedly in the context of NAFTA and it showed up when Canada was negotiating CETA. Guess what the solution is? The rest of the treaty. That's where all the environmental protection stuff is, all the workers' rights, etc. If the laws are harmonized then the companies don't have a leg to stand on. Ever since Trump brought up renegotiating NAFTA, Trudeau and his team have been trying to use it to fix US law around unions in order to level the playing field. You can't sue if the laws are the same everywhere in the treaty zone.
This just in: systemd-powered prosthetics will begin shipping with GNOME pre-installed. At press time, Miguelenart de Poettericaza, spokesmonster for GNOMEmd says he expects this latest infliction upon the Slashdot community to be the ultimate achievement in nipple-twisting agony, and harrowingly suggested they were looking at encrypting all future system logs using blockchain technology to ensure that users would always have the best experience, whether they wanted it or not.
The music cue is the clue. K was definitely meant to be understood as kaput.
That is true, but, again, this is a specific body of work that combines the same recordings of nursery rhymes with bizarre gibberish videos. It's not content that anyone wants, and it's only thrived because of how YouTube's auto-play works, essentially using toddlers to farm ad money. Fingerprinting it will be pretty easy and reliable based on the reused audio channels.
RTFA. This is about a specific genre of semi-randomly-generated videos that exist only to extract ad revenue, not edgy MLP memes.
(...And yes, I know Surface tablets sell decently well. Just not "iPad" well. They haven't really found a niche, they've just been forcing their nose into a space better served by a laptop with a real keyboard.)
They tried that already. Gates himself picked Windows 8 tablets over the Courier because it was easier to integrate into the Outlook/Exchange ecosystem. Given how spectacularly and repeatedly Windows tablets have failed, it's good that they're finally revisiting what everyone thought was their ace in the hole against Apple. Watch this video. You're right, it's not a product for everyone, but for the creative professionals who make up the bulk of macOS's (ever-dwindling) userbase, it was way more attractive than the passivity of an iPad, and likely still is.
I believe the generally accepted view on the evolutionary impact of sexual dimorphism, in most mammals, is that males are experimental (and relatively expendable, as far as biological fitness is concerned; the act of copulation is a relatively brief part of childrearing.) Take, for example, the X chromosome: with only one copy, males experience its effects far more prominently. In females, one of the copies of the X chromosome is selected at random to be disabled, so the two copies are averaged out, statistically driving the overall phenotype toward the mean. There are a number of physiological traits that exhibit this pattern, for example men have a higher standard deviation in height than women. In a hunter-gatherer scenario, this protects the nucleus of the tribe from deleterious mutations, and is a key advantage of sexual reproduction.
Time to undo some mod points, because this comment is too good to pass up! I've been a student of Multics lore for a few years—it was way before my time—and the answer is that the obsession with this was beyond amazing. The MIT site would regularly split their system into two while doing debugging, removing IO controllers and CPUs from the main system (without shutting it down) until they had enough hardware set aside to bring up another instance of the OS, still sharing disk drives. They also a per-resource-usage billing system, that could price processing time and I/O as needed. It's much more meticulous accounting than what you'd see on a modern PBS-based cluster, or even Amazon Web Services. Most users would see an account balance upon logging in, and I believe some of the logs at the dps8m site, from when they were getting the emulator up and running, have balance numbers scattered throughout them. These are key features that distinguish Multics from other operating systems—there are lots of posts in this thread that mention Multics being distinctive, but none of them seem to actually touch on any details besides fault recovery.
The vision was called computing as a utility, and the Project MAC team wanted Multics machines to be as reliable and ubiquitous as electricity or telephone service. Alas, the clusters we have today are far more limited in accessibility and rarely have worthy access protections (I could, for example, ssh into a random node on my university's cluster and bring it to a halt with a forkbomb, messing up any jobs running on it), and to even approach the kind of scaling and subdivision Multics supported, we have to resort to networks of numerous discrete computers rather than a single, unified OS.
Joke available in both B5 and Voyager flavours!
Which prompts a very big question about how the Xiaomi Mix isn't prior art for the edge-to-edge screen patent. What the heck, guys?
It might! One of the infographics on the HPE site claims the population of Earth will be 80 billion by 2020. That's gonna necessitate a whole lot of good.
I really think you've hit on something there. At long last, I can see the author's true intentions revealed.
NOT RUINING ENOUGH HUMAN LIVES. CREATE MORE ROBOT JOBS OR WE WILL EXPLODE YOUR ECONOMY. END OF LINE.
More generally, if the information gets stolen, you can never change it. Locks, passwords, and challenge-response seeds can all be replaced. No other authentication method has this glaring weakness. The burden of manual authentication is here to stay, I think, until we get password manager brain implants.
Presumably they learned about it while taking the survey. The question I highlighted explains what it is. You did actually read the post, right?
As you may know, net neutrality is a set of rules which say Internet Service Providers (ISPs) such as Comcast, Time Warner, AT&T, and Verizon, cannot block, throttle or prioritize certain content on the Internet. Knowing this, do you support or oppose net neutrality?
So that's 61% in favour of net neutrality rather than the abstract jargon-laden questions of 88% of people disagreeing with "the government should have the ability to set the specific prices, terms and conditions for Internet access," the 43% people who believe the internet would "get worse" if "government were to regulate Internet access as a utility" (ignoring the fact that it arguably already does, and things clearly are not getting progressively worse already), and the 51% who said "Internet access should not be considered a public utility regulated by the federal government" when it was compared to everything but telecommunications.
Two points arise from this: the 5% of people who 'strongly oppose' net neutrality may very well believe they're supporting censorship of terrorist propaganda, and if there is a major overlap between the population segment that wants an open internet and the one that wants minimal government interference in ISPs, they're probably free-market idealists who want the ISPs to have the good taste to maintain net neutrality without government oversight, much like the software industry created the ESRB to avoid government regulation of video game ratings.
It is, I think, absurd to conclude that any majority of the population is in favour of Comcast absorbing a bunch of media companies and manipulating rules so it can steal Netflix's income with XFINITY TV—no matter how many layers of bullshit they bury it under.
It's not surprising the comment resonates with him—buzzwords like "bipartisan light-touch" are basically copied right out of his mouth. Maybe he's behind the bot?
It doesn't, as I said; all of the positives that he cites would be obtainable if Windows Update were hookable by others. Presumably he feels that the success of a Store-limited version of Windows is the only marketplace-feasible way to accomplish this, as developers would be pressured into using it in order to reach an audience, but that's really more of a reason why Windows 10 S won't succeed in any real sense, beyond filling Microsoft's traditional need to inure an impressionable sub-population (in this case, the next generation of children) to Windows.
Traditionally I think it was not ASCII, but CP-1252 that worked on Slashdot.
CP-1252: äåé®üúíóöáßðøæ©ñ瀼½¾‘’ (okay, so not all of it. Mostly vowels.)
Unicode Greek: ; (the entire alphabet reduced to one erotimatiko, which I expect really is just a semicolon.)
The summary provided isn't terribly sharp; it takes out any of the justification provided in the Ars piece and relates mostly the author's opinions. Mr. Bright's actual argument is that the Windows 10 Store fills the hole of a single, consistent package manager, promising that applications will be cleanly installed, updated, and uninstalled without the diversity of mechanisms abundant currently. He doesn't offer any defense of Windows 10 S beyond that, nor of the essential problem of a locked-down ecosystem and all of the censorship-related complications, which are waved off in the first three paragraphs (along with a screenshot of the Popcorn Time installer failing to run.) I don't believe he even defends the ostensible cleanliness benefits of closed ecosystems. All of the positives that he cites would be obtainable if it were simply possible to hook into Windows Update, a notion he mentions.
Better news! A cottage industry has emerged over night to manufacture fake social media profiles for this sole purpose. Yawn.